I have started to think that inappropriate content might be that serious. If we think it's wrong, yet don't take it for the seriousness as it is, we may not do our best to avoid it. Thoughts?
Matthew 5:28 as a flavor text, if it is being treated as the word inappropriate content implies, probably yes. It's a matter of the heart.I have started to think that inappropriate content is that serious.
inappropriate content is text, photos, or video. The way a person reacts to inappropriate content determines whether or not it does damage. The use of inappropriate content has been associated with lust in some people. Lust was a step on the path to worse, unless the next step turns away from lust.I have started to think that inappropriate content might be that serious.
So in Matthew 5:28, Jesus bridged the two concepts. All sin is the same to God, the seed is the tree is the fruit - same with good things too.inappropriate content is text, photos, or video. The way a person reacts to inappropriate content determines whether or not it does damage. The use of inappropriate content has been associated with lust in some people. Lust was a step on the path to worse, unless the next step turns away from lust.
inappropriate content is from the Greek word inappropriate contenteia. inappropriate contenteia was used to describe prostitution, premarital sex (fornication), etc. A different Greek word is used to describe adultery.
inappropriate contenteia Definition — What is the meaning of the Greek word inappropriate contenteia in the Bible?
I have started to think that inappropriate content might be that serious. If we think it's wrong, yet don't take it for the seriousness as it is, we may not do our best to avoid it. Thoughts?
So in Matthew 5:28, Jesus bridged the two concepts. All sin is the same to God, the seed is the tree is the fruit - same with good things too.
I think it is absolutely... As Jesus said even looking at another with lust in your heart is adultery.
However, I dont get the draw of inappropriate content myself. It's nothing that even interests me as a human being, and I don't, can't in fact, understand anyone's struggle with it as a serious temptation so while I can call it sin all day long I don't understand why any Christian might be drawn to it in the first place. It confuses me truly.
According to what Jesus said, no. There is no difference at all.Is all sin the same to God? Is there no difference to God if I lust for a woman on the street or if I have sex with her?
According to what Jesus said, no. There is no difference at all.
From our perspective it may not make as much sense, but God lives in a different dimensional reality so time flows differently there.
It is written elsewhere in the bible that the lamp of the wicked is sin.What about Paul then?
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
— 1 Corinthians 6:9-11
It is written elsewhere in the bible that the lamp of the wicked is sin.
Just as God's light gives a rainbow of faith, hope, and love and everything in between.
Sin prisms out as well in the way it manifests in creation, but sin is sin, it's all the same to God.
Paul also said it is no longer I who sin, but the sin within me that sins O wretched man that I am.Paul is describing acts of sin. Do you think he says just looking at a woman with lust and we won't inherit the kingdom of God? Then how many can be saved?
Paul also said it is no longer I who sin, but the sin within me that sins O wretched man that I am.
The body is carnal and won't be saved anyway. Cultivate the divine nature and outgrow the carnal - guilt re-inforces the addictive cycles anyway.
But I like to understand exactly what Paul means. To me it sounds like he is referring to people that live this way, they steal, cheat, commit adultery on regular basis etc. Getting drunk once doesn't make you a drunkard. The problem is that many lust for women on regular basis even they would never go through with more than looking. That's why I think there might be difference from looking than acting.
The heart is what matters, but explaining how a lustful gaze has the same connective potential as an actual touch is a little off topic.But I like to understand exactly what Paul means. To me it sounds like he is referring to people that live this way, they steal, cheat, commit adultery on regular basis etc. Getting drunk once doesn't make you a drunkard. The problem is that many lust for women on regular basis even they would never go through with more than looking. That's why I think there might be difference from looking than acting.
Even if you are right there is no difference in God's eyes, there is difference how it effects our heart. Calling someone a prick or murdering someone has a very different impact on our heart.
The heart is what matters, but explaining how a lustful gaze has the same connective potential as an actual touch is a little off topic.
I guess if it was just a piece of paper that would make sense.No not really. If our heart is like a piece of paper. A small sin is a small dot. A big sin is a huge dot. If bigger sins muddens our hearts more, how can God see all sins the same way?